Jump to content

Sat 17 Oct: Challenge Cup Final: Leeds Rhinos v Salford Red Devils KO 3pm (BBC)


Who will win?  

79 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will win?

    • Leeds Rhinos by 13 points or more
      15
    • Leeds Rhinos by 7 to 12 points
      11
    • Leeds Rhinos by 1 to 6 points
      5
    • Draw after 80 minutes
      0
    • Salford Red Devils by 1 to 6 points
      23
    • Salford Red Devils by 7 to 12 points
      19
    • Salford Red Devils by 13 points or more
      6

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 17/10/20 at 14:30

Recommended Posts

Evidence or loss of credibility - your choice.

"We are easily breakable, by illness or falling, or a million other ways of leaving this earthly life. We are just so much mashed potato."  Don Estelle

Link to comment
Share on other sites


19 minutes ago, Trojan said:

Couldn't say now, but it was noticeable that a Leeds player committed the same offence.  Inconsistency in refereeing is a major malady of the game.  Suddenly applying a law you've been ignoring is typical of the today's refs.

I think I recall which incident you are referring to, and I believe it was Prior using the ball to leverage himself up and then "play" it. I thought at the time that it was very messy and people may compare the two - I believe the commentators may have said something, but they weren't even aware of the reason the knock on was given in the first place.

The only difference was, that he didn't fall over - That was the only reason the knock on was given, and no Leeds player fell over - there wasn't an identical incident, there were 2 in the game and both were ruled as knock ons. 

He was being consistent in his decision making when applying this rule, as most ref's have been since its introduction.

Edited by Click
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

Slightest touch ? 

A touch is a touch , much easier to judge than the weight of touch 

It is another area where the RFL has left it up to the referees to interpret - They can rule, as they did in this instance, that this grown man should have been able to maintain his feet and play the ball correctly, and ruled that the weight of the Leeds player touching him didn't make him to play the ball incorrectly. 

He surrendered in the tackle, decided that he wanted a quick PTB and failed in getting one by playing it incorrectly and causing the knock on decision.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Click said:

I think I recall which incident you are referring to, and I believe it was Prior using the ball to leverage himself up and then "play" it. I thought at the time that it was very messy and people may compare the two - I believe the commentators may have said something, but they weren't even aware of the reason the knock on was given in the first place.

The only difference was, that he didn't fall over - That was the only reason the knock on was given, and no Leeds player fell over - there wasn't an identical incident, there were 2 in the game and both were ruled as knock ons. 

He was being consistent in his decision making when applying this rule, as most ref's have been since its introduction.

Hmm  you clearly haven't watched much Championship rugby.  I thought it was a good game.  I was ambivalent about who I wanted to win.  I'm from the Leeds area, but a huge Kevin Brown fan.  It's a shame there had to be a loser.  Whether that decision actually affected the result, who can say, but it was for me fairly typical of the standard of reffing these days.

  • Like 1

“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Trojan said:

Hmm  you clearly haven't watched much Championship rugby.  I thought it was a good game.  I was ambivalent about who I wanted to win.  I'm from the Leeds area, but a huge Kevin Brown fan.  It's a shame there had to be a loser.  Whether that decision actually affected the result, who can say, but it was for me fairly typical of the standard of reffing these days.

Thanks - I have watched some Championship rugby, as I am a London fan, and we have been in there for awhile now(bar 1 season).


I also thought it was a good game overall, I don't believe that decision was what cost Salford the game, they had the chance for a DG and they messed it up.

I just find it funny that this example where the referee has been consistent is being brought up as "typical of the standard of reffing these days" - Overall Moore had a good game I thought, didn't get much wrong from what I recall, and was pretty consistent both ways in my eyes. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Niels said:

We aren't really interested to be honest. I preferred to watch the horse racing and golf. I watched the last 10 minutes as a friend had it on.  Even then I was more bothered about final score. 

Had it been on Sky or  St Helens or Warrington then I would have watched, but then they.are likeable play attractive rugby.

 

 

 

So why are you commenting on it in a forum if you’re not interested?

  • Like 7
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JohnM said:

He can't lose something he hasn't got. 

I'm giving him the chance to back up his claims. Or a whole lot of rope, depending on his response.

"We are easily breakable, by illness or falling, or a million other ways of leaving this earthly life. We are just so much mashed potato."  Don Estelle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Chrispmartha said:

So why are you commenting on it in a forum if you’re not interested?

Because it's a competition as a whole not just a final.

My team entered the tournament, and I was interested and attended until they went out. 

I think my lack of interest in the final is a sign of how the challenge cup is now very devalued but that's another story altogether. 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Niels said:

Because it's a competition as a whole not just a final.

My team entered the tournament, and I was interested and attended until they went out. 

I think my lack of interest in the final is a sign of how the challenge cup is now very devalued but that's another story altogether. 

Hilarious.

You say the challenge cup is devalued.  And at the same time you will refuse to watch after that because your team got knocked out!

Remarkable. There are a lot of dim people in this world.  But thats another story altogether.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite so. The Challenge Cup Final is the end point of the Road To Wembley and is the point of this topic. Posts  ritually moaning about the refs are disrespecting the Final, the result and the thread. 

Sure, we can get excited when the match officials don't seem to know the rules as well as we do, and we can get exited when there clearly is a conspiracy against our team, but in the cold light of day and replay, we do realise its er.. incorrect. (even the Times style guide allows the word "b. 0.llocks") 

 

 

Four legs good - two legs bad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Quite so. The Challenge Cup Final is the end point of the Road To Wembley and is the point of this topic. Posts  ritually moaning about the refs are disrespecting the Final, the result and the thread. 

Sure, we can get excited when the match officials don't seem to know the rules as well as we do, and we can get exited when there clearly is a conspiracy against our team, but in the cold light of day and replay, we do realise its er.. incorrect. (even the Times style guide allows the word "b. 0.llocks") 

This is the 21st century, when "unfounded and incoherent rage" is the blanket acceptable response to everything and anything that happens. Just look at our leaders; if they're doing it, it must be right for the rest of us.

  • Like 2

"We are easily breakable, by illness or falling, or a million other ways of leaving this earthly life. We are just so much mashed potato."  Don Estelle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

Hilarious.

You say the challenge cup is devalued.  And at the same time you will refuse to watch after that because your team got knocked out!

Remarkable. There are a lot of dim people in this world.  But thats another story altogether.

Yes, I can see this from your post!

I follow my team and attend their games regardless of the competion and whether we have a realistic chance of winning. 

I prefer/preferred the Northern Rail trophy, Yorkshire cup, the 1895 cup to the challenge cup, where certain teams only enter at the last 16!

Some Leeds fans on here were referencing their 50 point win against HKR yet in the end needed a very disputable decision to even win against a team with Covid issues.

🙂

 

 

 

 

Edited by Niels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Niels said:

Because it's a competition as a whole not just a final.

My team entered the tournament, and I was interested and attended until they went out. 

I think my lack of interest in the final is a sign of how the challenge cup is now very devalued but that's another story altogether. 

 

 

 

 

 

Your lack of interest in the final is so much that you’re posting on a dedicated thread about the final you’re not interested in.

 

righty ho.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chrispmartha said:

Your lack of interest in the final is so much that you’re posting on a dedicated thread about the final you’re not interested in.

 

righty ho.

I was interested in the thoughts of posters about the referring decision.

In fairness I did get some constructive replies that understood this - well one!

 

 

Edited by Niels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/10/2020 at 07:40, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

I said it’d be nice to beat the 50-0 win, not that I expect it to happen. 
Leeds will easily cover the -6 point handicap though, I’m not sure how the bookies have come up with that.

Had a little chuckle at this as in a past life back in the 50's I did a little 'bookies running' for my uncle who was a registered bookmaker and club owner who didn't lack for anything in life.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Click said:

To answer your question - no it wouldn't have been blown up in a SoO game, because they don't have the rule that the ref blew the knock on for. They don't have to "regain their feet and maintain balance" like they do in SL

In my view there`s nothing wrong with the tackled player choosing to play the ball whilst still in contact, if he meets the criteria of lifting and placing the ball, regaining his feet, and making a genuine attempt to play it backwards with the foot. It`s precisely because the Aussies have enforced this latter requirement that they can tolerate more contact without it breaking down. 

If there`s ongoing contact, but the tackled player can meet the criteria, the defender gains no advantage. Only if the tacklers have released and the tackled player initiates further contact, and gains an advantage, should he be penalised. It`s the tackled player`s equivalent of a second effort. Or a form of obstruction.

8 hours ago, Click said:

I understand completely what you mean - but this is a specific rule that has been enforced for the last few seasons - other infringements have been ignored for awhile now, and continue to be ignored, i.e. playing it with the foot.

If our refs continue to ignore the requirement to make a genuine effort to play the ball with the foot, all their other rulings cannot make sense. So long as UK players are coached to use a Touch Football Rollball, the UK RL ruck will have no integrity.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Niels said:

Yes, I can see this from your post!

I follow my team and attend their games regardless of the competion and whether we have a realistic chance of winning. 

I prefer/preferred the Northern Rail trophy, Yorkshire cup, the 1895 cup to the challenge cup, where certain teams only enter at the last 16!

Some Leeds fans on here were referencing their 50 point win against HKR yet in the end needed a very disputable decision to even win against a team with Covid issues.

🙂

You are confusing 2 different things.  We have 12 fully professional clubs whose main income comes from TV money.  The Cup has changed, its plausible to say its been devalued (in the way the FA Cup has), but its changed because in its origins it was for 30 part time, very part time, clubs.  Its not now. The place to bring in the SL clubs is irrelevant.  The honest thing is to abolish the Cup all together.

If you did not watch the game you cannot complain about any play the balls, and the Salford player made a lazy mistake at a crucial moment.  Its very sad and I'd wished he hasn't. But they did.

My main complaint about the game is that it was pretty repetitive and not very inventive,  with endless high kicks to the corners. Possibly one quick thinking action from Salford when returning a kick gave them a spectacular try. But not much invention. Gale was a one man team... but fair doos to him, he has come back from terrible injuries.

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leeds have been involved in the "Watersplash " final forever remembered for the torrential rain . Let's hope this is the only " Corvid" final . Both teams gave us a great game it deserved a full stadium

  • Like 2

 Soon we will be dancing the fandango
FROM 2004,TO DO WHAT THIS CLUB HAS DONE,IF THATS NOT GREATNESSTHEN i DONT KNOW WHAT IS.

JAMIE PEACOCK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...